tv Hardball Weekend MSNBC May 5, 2012 5:00am-5:30am EDT
good evening, i'm chris matthews. in washington leading off tonight, the numbers game, what are we to make of the latest jobs number. the economy added 115,000 jobs last month and the unemployment rate dropped to 0.18%. and the chief economist and nobel peace prize winner paul krugman says that things would be bet ter if the republicans gt out of the way. he joins us. and dirty angry money. governor david switser does not like money and politics, and he is hoping to have a prairie fire out west. he will join us here. and plus, why do the gay republicans want to be in a political party that won't defend them? isn't that a fundamental question? if people don't like it, why are
you there? we will ask congressman foley. and also clint hill who is a great man will join us to tell us what he saw back in november of 1963. and let me finish tonight with overdue praise for the secret service. we begin with today's jobs report. paul krugman is a columnist for the "new york times" and author of the book "end this depression now" and john heilemann is an editor of new york magazine. and today, the jobs report was a mixed job report, and added to the payrolls were 115,000 jobs and the rate dropped to 0.18% which is the lowest rate since president obama took office, but economic forecasters were predicting bigger growth this month, and they saw the smallest gains. but in the overall picture, consistent jobs growth for some time now, and looking at the chart, and the recession started under the previous president, of course, w. as shown in the red has seen job gains for the past
two years and the obama years are blue. you can see the uptick there month by month. paul krugman, you are the ideal and you speak for what people would like to see as policy in the country and i will give you a minute or so and then john to respond to the political responsibility for that. if you were in charge, there was no right wing opposition and no middle of the road opposition, but you as an economist saying what should be fiscal policy, and what kind of policy would you have run since coming to office being president obama, and what would you have done, if anything? >> well a lot more, stimulus, and they hate the word now, but the stimulus should have been bigger and more sustained and above all, there should have been a continuing program of aid to state and local governments so they wouldn't be forced to cut their spending and forced to cut employment. we passed a landmark as of the latest job report private sector employment is back to what it was when barack obama was sworn in as president, but the public
sector has been falling such as schoolteachers, which is the biggest drag on the economy and wrong hitted. so we are not talking about stimulus, but talk about why are we doing the austerity that is preventing the full-fledged recovery. so if i could have waved the wand or dictator for the day, let's have an adequate sustained program to keep the government spending up and people employed until the private sector is ready to spend again. other stuff we could talk about and we should have had more housing mortgage relief and more federal policy from the federal reserve, but this is the time for the government to spend and not the time to cutback. if we could have done that and you can look at the numbers right now and say, if we had done that unemployment would be under 7% right now and in a much better situation and well on the way to being out of this whole thing. >> okay. that is if we had one party rule, john heilemann, but we don't. we have two parties vying for the party and checking each other for doing what they
believe. and why not -- lay it out -- why is that not politically possible what mr. krugman said would have been ideal policy and much more expansionary fiscal policy and more aid to the state and local ko counties? >> well, there are a fair number of conservative democrats in the house and the senate that would have quailed had barack obama had pushed for a bigger stimulus than he did. it is still an open question given the approval rating that he had coming into the office at almost 70% and maybe above 70% whether he could have done something bigger. the political advisers thought that you could not get near the trillion dollar number although some economists that we know working for him and advocating for that number, and a political calculation was made and very hard to pass that bill at $800 billion which barely passed as you remember, and certainly
after the case, there is no appetite for that type of expansionary fiscal party and again not the republicans who are certainly steadfast against it, but a lot of to democrats who are not seeing an immediate payoff in erm tgs of the jobs numbers and the economic picture are afraid to go that way. one of the biggest mistakes that barack obama made is to not set the expectations low at the very beginning of the administration and not talk about how long it would take to get out of the trough by raising expectations that the first stimulus would solve the problem, he created a problem down the line when it did not work more quickly. >> here is this morning, mr. romney and i want you to respond to mr. romney doing the political knee-jerk, and relished he had a good night's sleep and up early and loaded for bear and here he is enjoying the bad numbers. let's watch. >> we should be seeing the numbers in the 500,000 jobs created per month and this is way, way off in what should happen in a normal recovery and it is a terrible and disappointing report this morning. clearly the american people are wondering why this recovery is not happening faster, and why it is taking years and years for
the recovery to occur. >> and e well shg well, there y. can you respond to romney, mr. krugman? >> well, the last time we had 500,000 a month job numbers was a president by the name of bill clinton. this recovery is better than the recovery that george w. bush watched over, and since mr. romney wants to recapitulate bush policies, this is terrible. he is completely right that this is not what we wanted to see, but is romney proposing anything that would not make it worse? it is important to take a look not just at the united states, but overseas, because the republican prescription is for big government spending cuts, a and they are claiming that will create lots of jobs. we are getting those in europe. take a look at ireland. take a look at spain where they are getting exactly what the republicans say we should do, and those are catastrophes, right? >> well, the catastrophes, you did not mention the netherlands
and the problem in europe rebelled against the slow-growth or no-growth policies and the republicans layer it up saying we will cut the spending and then want it both ways and cut the programs that affect the poor people, and the british labor party guy said to me over there, and said the right wingers and guys like romney believe that the best way to get poor people to work is to cut them and the best way for rich people to work hard ser to give them harder and why to be better for the rich people, but if you screw the poor people, they will be whipped into action somehow. >> right. if you look for a logical explanation, you won't find it, but what you will ask is who are the masters or whose interests are the party serving and it is clear that the republican party given a choice between what actu actually makes sense economically and reverse robinhood, you know what they will choose. so it is frustrating for
somebody in my position, but it is more frustrating for the 3.9 million people out of work for more than a year, but we have had an acid test of economic doctrines and look at what has happened in europe and the austerity problems have worked and look at the south korea who have had economic programs and we have had an acid test, and the keynesian doctrine has been of whelmingly confirmed. and if we end the depression now, and end it fast in 18 months if we did the right beli >> but what about john heilemann's question, how do you sell the deficit, and get to 1.6 or 1.9 and the american people will see two to one spending over revenues a and this is world war ii rashing over the bond sales. can you sustain it politically? >> the people tend to think about the next news cycle and
not how it plays out. the best political strategy is the one that delivers the best result. and in terms of the short run news cycle last fall obama made a bid for more economic support which wasn't enacted and didn't expect it, but he went birg than people expect and bolder and i was happy and surprised it was good, but apparently the political team were saying the numbers will scare people, but turns out that it was not that way at all and the public welcomed the prospect that obama was trying to do something. he needs to stand up for what he thinks is right. he needs to say, this is the right thing to do. and then he has to do a truman and say, this is the do-nothing congress standing in the way of giving you people jobs. >> the name of the book is "end this depression now." paul krugman, everybody reads you as the ideal, and the question is how close can we get to the ideal. and john heilemann, i wish that we had more time for you tonight and we do miss you and maybe one of the best guests and maybe one of the two or three favorite guests here, and i won't say who
the other ones are. and dirty angry money, and the floodgates are open, and david switser does not like it. and it is dirty and angry money and he is determined to get corporate money banned from politics. and governor switzer from montana comes to us next on "hardball." try charmin ultra sg for a clean with fewer pieces left behind. its diamondweave texture is soft and more durable so it holds up better for a more dependable clean. fewer pieces left behind. charmin ultra strong. [ sneezes ] [ male announcer ] you may be an allergy muddler. try zyrtec® for powerful allergy relief. and zyrtec® is different than claritin® because it starts working faster on the first day you take it. zyrtec®. love the air. [ sneezes ]
could've had a v8. and then treats day after y...on well, shoot, that's like checking on your burgers after they're burnt! [ male announcer ] eat your frequent heartburn by blocking the acid with prilosec otc. and don't get heartburn in the first place! [ male announcer ]ne pill a day. 24 hours. zero heartburn.
welcome back to "hardball." as part of the series "dirty angry money" we are looking at the influns of the super pacs and the influence on the electoral system and it stems from the supreme court decision citizens united. it said that elections could not be banned with contributions. and the opposition was from the
state of montana. the supreme court upheld a law out there which is in defiance to the supreme court citizens united decision. the state of montana bars corporate spending in elections. well, governor brian swits z zer -- schweitzer and his lieutenant governor made a law to bancorp r corporate spending government, and they say that the corporate spending to buy elections has to stop. tell us how you and the lieutenant governor have the power to challenge this awful new supreme court ruling that has really dirtied up the politics? >> well, we have the power, because we are citizens of the united states of america and we have the power, because in montana we have initiative 166 and stand with montanians and we are saying that corporations are not people, and they are not
allowed to bribe their way into the state capital or i guess even in washington, d.c. there is something really perverse about this. in 1977 congress said that the corrupt foreign practices act made it unlawful to bribe politicians in other countries, but now they are saying that a they can bride them in the united states, so we have a monopoly on bribery here in the country, and what is that saying to the rest of the world? corporations spend money in elections to get something. they get something which is lower taxes or less regulation and you can't describe it any other way. me as a shareholder, i don't dislike corporations, but if i were to ask the corporate ceo why we gave money in the last election, he would say to you, we have oget something, because for every $5 we spent, we get something back, and that is bribery. >> and i thought about this through the afternoon with the producers, if this is really to make money for people and get the right politicians in to do your number and march to your tune and all, you might as well
get a tax deduction for it, and go all of of the way for the absurdity, and if it is in the business interests to buy a politician, that is another cost of doing business and perhaps carrying it to absurdity, but let me ask you about the system. looking at the numbers to helpp you make the case perhaps and something like 46 people and corporations are providing the lion's share of all of the corporate money, and all of the money of running the campaigns down to 50 people right now. it's a few people. like the koch brothers and shelled aelman and others and the old american horror stories where 17 families ran the country, and it is getting back to that. and in our republican -- >> well, it is worse than that, and again, i'm not anti-corporation and i'm a shareholder like a lot of america is. if you own a little corporation or family corporation, you might say, well, we want to get involved in politics, too, and we have an extra $5,000 or $10,000 to invest it, and you are a piker. if you compare yourself to big
pharma and big p insurance and the military defense contractors you cannot catch up there. is no possibility to have a place at the table. it is a couple of dozen multinational corporations to decide the elections, and by the way, the multinational corporations are also owned by foreign nationals so are we also saying that if you are a resident of germany or japan or even china or iran and you are a shareholder in a corporation that now you get to have a role in american elections? come on! nobody is accept iing that. >> let me ask you how you are going to do this, because we are looking down the road to the next six months of the worst amount of spending in american history on campaigns on both sides, because the obama people have to match it, but here is the negative advertisement that has no signature on it and totally negative in every case and trash the opponents and all of the republicans trash obama and the democrats retort and trash romney and all of the terrible things so that nobody
wants to vote. and you have a 1912 law and you go to the supreme court and roberts is thinking that he made a mistake and judge roberts and inclined that they are kind of embarrassed by the series off decisions to add up to the mayhem and any chance to reverse? >> well, they dang sure ought to be embarrassed by this, but on the ballot in montana, we will have initiative 166 that simply says that we in montana reaffirm that corporations are not people, and that corporations cannot bribe people in these elections and it is on the ballot. and we are hoping that other states and now this ballot will direct our congressional delegation to support a constitutional amendment that simply says that the corporations are not people, and that they cannot bribe politicians. now montana maybe has to go first again. we went first in 1912 when we banned corporate money in the elections and we don't mind going first this time, because we understand in montana what corporations can do when they own an entire state. the copper kings owned all of
the montana, lock, stock, barrel, and it is montanians who stood up and said, not in montana. so if we can get the prairie fire started in montana and people hear about it in other states, they will demand from their congressional members to paz a constitutional amendment to make the elections clean again, and otherwise, foreigners by investing in american corporations will be involved in the e llections and corporation will be able to bribe members of congress and in state capitals to get whatever tax and regulatory treatment they want. this is not the american way. this is not what made this country great, and we want to have americans to stand up, and we will start right here in montana, thank you very much. >> i think it amazing the pointu make, sir, to stand up and the fact that you can go to jail for bribing the mexican officials, but you can do it here under the law. thank you governor brian schweitzer and good luck with the campaign. now that newt gingrich is out of the race, does he still
back to "hardball" and for the side show. now that newt gingrich is preparing himself for the torture of endorsing mitt romney, people are waiting to see if he will take back some of the romney-bashing from the primary season. take a look at one of the zingers and how newt danced around it in an interview last night. >> i have to ask you, are you calling mitt romney a liar? >> yes. >> you still believe that mitt romney is a liar? >> i still believe that the romney campaign said things that were not true. >> forget about the campaign, but is mitt romney a liar? >> the governor said things at times that were not true.
i think that is true. >> the answer is yes? >> i also believe that compared to barack obama, i would trust mitt romney ten times over. >> so now for newt gingrich, lying is a matter of degree, and he said more, but when you want to remember that all but forgotten michele bachmann campaign, here is something else to remember. >> people fail to realize that the united states is in an unstoppable decline, and they see the rise of china and the rise of india and the rise of the soviet union and our loss mi militarily going forward. >> again, that old bugaboo of forgetting the cold war and the soviet union have ceased to exist over 20 years ago and here she is reminiscing with cnn's david brody earlier in the week. >> you ran a close to impeccable campaign close to mistake-free. >> thank you. thank you. it really was. we were extremely careful and we were almost mistake-free but for
those two points, and elvis presley and john wayne's birthplace and i have apologized and moved beyond. >> and those who have forgotten said that she and john wayne came from waterloo, iowa, not realizing that it was john wayne gay si and not the du-- gacy an duke. and you may recall this 1984 reagan campaign about bears in the woods. >> there's a bear in the woods. for some people, the bear is easy to see. others don't see it at all. some people say that the bear is tame. others say it is vicious and dangerous. since no one can really be sure who is right, isn't it smart to be as strong as the bear? if there is a bear. >> powerful ad. well last month vermont's democratic governor discovered that there were bears in the woods as well, four of them in fact.
peter shumlin says he woke up to the sound of four bears in the backyard at which point he burst on to the scene to retrieve his bird feeders and wound up being chased by one of the bears. while the campaign of his republican challenger apparently could not resist a reagan throwback. >> there is a bear in the woods. for most people in vermont, the bear is easy to see. why can't governor shum llin se any of the bears, clouding the democracy, and freedom being taken, and why can't the governor see any of them? isn't it smart to look out for the bears, since there are bears? >> i think that the reagan was better, sorry. and now coming up "your business" with j.j. ramberg. e t, one thing you can depend on is that these will come together. delicious and wholesome. some combinations were just meant to be. tomato soup from campbell's. it's amazing what soup can do.
you walk into a conventional mattress store, it's really not about you. they say, "well, if you wanted a firm bed you can lie on one of those." we provide the exact individualization that your body needs. oh, wow! that feels really good. it's about support where you find it most comfortable. to celebrate 25 years of better sleep-for both of you - sleep number introduces the silver edition bed set, at incredible savings of $1,000 for a limited time. only at the sleep number store, where queen mattresses start at just $699.